Most unhelpful is the conflation of three very different laws into "intellectual property". Trademarks, copyrights and patents have little more in common than do dogs, fish and trees. There is hardly anything to be gained by treating them together rather than individually. Apparently it is common for lawyers to specialise in this amalgamation, but that's a convenience for them, not us. It's as if the existence of ENT specialisation among doctors were to influence everybody else to refer to all three body parts interchangeably.
I have no problem with trademarks, on the whole, despite them lasting indefinitely. The Coca-Cola company does me no harm (and perhaps may do good through consumer protection) by being exclusively entitled to that name, and to the associated logo. If they should still be selling a delicious cola flavour beverage after a thousand years using the Coca-Cola brand name it wouldn't bother me at all.
Whereas by contrast patents are a scourge, rarely of real benefit to society even in ideal circumstances. If every patent law in force were to be abolished at midnight tonight I hardly think it could make the world overall a worse place although no doubt it would have its downsides.